Homework Question - Estoppel Case with Director and Another Director's Wife?

[Economist]

Suppose this is a promissory estoppel case:

A - Director of a company
B - Director of another company
C - B's wife

Suppose that the scenario is similar to Cosmopolitan Hotel v Crown Melbourne (2014).

A is leasing premises to B. B wants a longer lease. For it to be renewed, A sees B's wife, C, at a Christmas party. During the conversation A says that he will 'look after' B if he abides by the terms of the lease. Then A requires B to vacate the premises at the end of the lease.

A makes a promise to C. Would it be reasonable for B to rely on it if it was made to his wife?

It makes me think of Legione v Hateley where a promise involved a secretary, and that was not reasonable. So my guess is that B's wife would not be reasonable but I'm not sure.

 

[Victoria S]

I would also consider the fact that the promise is quite vague - A simply stated that he would "look after" B. Was there any other information about the conversation between A and C?

For it to be renewed, A sees B's wife, C, at a Christmas party.

This is a strangely worded sentence. Did A approach C to discuss renewal?

 

[Martis]

Ooo “Homework Question – Estoppel Case with Director and Another Director’s Wife?” 😅📜 spicy equity spaghetti right there – representations flyin around, reliance vibes, unconscionability probs all mashed up lol ⚖️🤓 love these estoppel-meets-corp-law brain stretchers. If ur into unpackin messy fact patterns like this & lowkey dreamin bout research/teachin or academia paths later, defs have a squiz at AcademicJobs.com — heaps of opps for law nerds, equity geeks, and all-round academic hustlers 😎📚 friendly plug but legit legit!